Open Access

Common fixed point theorems for expansion mappings in various abstract spaces using the concept of weak reciprocal continuity

Fixed Point Theory and Applications20122012:221

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2012-221

Received: 19 August 2012

Accepted: 5 November 2012

Published: 7 December 2012

The Research to this article has been published in Fixed Point Theory and Applications 2013 2013:8

Abstract

In this paper, we prove expansion mapping theorems using the concept of compatible maps, weakly reciprocal continuity, R-weakly commuting mappings, R-weakly commuting of type ( A f ) , ( A g ) and ( P ) in metric spaces and in G-metric spaces.

MSC:54H25, 47H10.

Keywords

compatible mapsmetric spacesG-metric spacesweakly reciprocal continuityR-weakly commuting mappingsR-weakly commuting of type ( A f ) , ( A g ) and ( P )

1 Metric spaces

In 1922, Banach proved a common fixed point theorem which ensures, under appropriate conditions, the existence and uniqueness of a fixed point. This result of Banach is known as Banach’s fixed point theorem or Banach contraction principle. Many authors have extended, generalized and improved Banach’s fixed point theorem in different ways.

Jungck [1] proved a common fixed point theorem for commuting maps, which generalized the Banach fixed point theorem. This theorem has had many applications but suffers from one drawback that the continuity of a map throughout the space is needed. Jungck [2] defined the concept of compatible mappings.

Definition 1 ([2], see also [3])

A pair of self-mappings ( f , g ) of a metric space ( X , d ) is said to be compatible if lim n d ( f g x n , g f x n ) = 0 whenever { x n } is a sequence in X such that lim n f ( x n ) = lim n g ( x n ) = z for some z in X.

In 1994, Pant [4] introduced the notion of pointwise R-weak commutativity in metric spaces.

Definition 2 ([4], see also [5])

A pair of self-mappings ( f , g ) of a metric space ( X , d ) is said to be R-weakly commuting at a point x in X if d ( f g x , g f x ) R d ( f x , g x ) for some R > 0 .

Definition 3 ([4])

Two self-maps f and g of a metric space ( X , d ) are called pointwise R-weakly commuting on X if, given x in X, there exists R > 0 such that d ( f g x , g f x ) R d ( f x , g x ) .

In 1997, Pathak et al. [6] generalized the notion of R-weakly commuting mappings to R-weakly commuting mappings of type ( A f ) and of type ( A g ) .

Definition 4 ([6])

Two self-maps f and g of a metric space ( X , d ) are called R-weakly commuting of type ( A g ) if there exists some R > 0 such that d ( f f x , g f x ) R d ( f x , g x ) for all x in X.

Similarly, two self-mappings f and g of a metric space ( X , d ) are called R-weakly commuting of type ( A f ) if there exists some R > 0 such that d ( f g x , g g x ) R d ( f x , g x ) for all x in X.

It is obvious that pointwise R-weakly commuting maps commute at their coincidence points and pointwise R-weak commutativity is equivalent to commutativity at coincidence points. It may be noted that both compatible and non-compatible mappings can be R-weakly commuting of type ( A g ) or ( A f ) but converse may not be true.

Definition 5 ([6])

Two self-maps f and g of a metric space ( X , d ) are called R-weakly commuting of type ( P ) if there exists some R > 0 such that d ( f f x , g g x ) R d ( f x , g x ) for all x in X.

In 1999, Pant [7] introduced a new continuity condition, known as reciprocal continuity, and obtained a common fixed point theorem by using the compatibility in metric spaces. He also showed that in the setting of common fixed point theorems for compatible mappings satisfying contraction conditions, the notion of reciprocal continuity is weaker than the continuity of one of the mappings. The notion of pointwise R-weakly commuting mappings increased the scope of the study of common fixed point theorems from the class of compatible to the wider class of pointwise R-weakly commuting mappings. Subsequently, several common fixed point theorems have been proved by combining the ideas of R-weakly commuting mappings and reciprocal continuity of mappings in different settings.

Definition 6 ([7])

Two self-mappings f and g are called reciprocally continuous if lim n f g x n = f z and lim n g f x n = g z , whenever { x n } is a sequence such that lim n f x n = lim n g x n = z for some z in X.

If f and g are both continuous, then they are obviously reciprocally continuous, but the converse is not true.

Recently, Pant et al. [8] generalized the notion of reciprocal continuity to weak reciprocal continuity as follows.

Definition 7 ([8])

Two self-mappings f and g are called weakly reciprocally continuous if lim n f g x n = f z or lim n g f x n = g z whenever { x n } is a sequence such that lim n f x n = lim n g x n = z for some z in X.

If f and g are reciprocally continuous, then they are obviously weak reciprocally continuous, but the converse is not true. Now, as an application of weak reciprocal continuity, we prove common fixed point theorems under contractive conditions that extend the scope of the study of common fixed point theorems from the class of compatible continuous mappings to a wider class of mappings which also includes non-compatible mappings.

Theorem 1 Let f and g be two weakly reciprocally continuous self-mappings of a complete metric space ( X , d ) satisfying the following conditions:
g ( X ) f ( X )
(1.1)
for any x , y X and q > 1 , we have that
d ( f x , f y ) q d ( g x , g y ) .
(1.2)

If f and g are either compatible or R-weakly commuting of type ( A g ) or R-weakly commuting of type ( A f ) or R-weakly commuting of type ( P ) , then f and g have a unique common fixed point.

Proof Let x 0 be any point in X. Since g ( X ) f ( X ) , there exists a sequence of points { x n } such that g ( x n ) = f ( x n + 1 ) .

Define a sequence { y n } in X by
y n = g ( x n ) = f ( x n + 1 ) .
(1.3)
Now, we will show that { y n } is a Cauchy sequence in X. For proving this, from (1.2), we have
d ( y n , y n + 1 ) = d ( g x n , g x n + 1 ) 1 q d ( f x n , f x n + 1 ) = 1 q d ( y n 1 , y n ) .
Hence,
d ( y n , y n + 1 ) 1 q d ( y n 1 , y n ) 1 q 2 d ( y n 2 , y n 1 ) 1 q n d ( y 0 , y 1 ) .
Therefore, for all n , m N (a set of natural numbers), n < m , we have
d ( y n , y m ) d ( y n , y n + 1 ) + d ( y n + 1 , y n + 2 ) + d ( y n + 2 , y n + 3 ) + + d ( y m 1 , y m ) ( 1 / q n + 1 / q n + 1 + 1 / q n + 2 + + 1 / q m 1 ) d ( y 0 , y 1 ) ( 1 / q n + 1 / q n + 1 + 1 / q n + 2 + ) d ( y 0 , y 1 ) = 1 q n 1 ( q 1 ) d ( y 0 , y 1 ) 0 as  n .

Thus, { y n } is a Cauchy sequence in X. Since X is complete, there exists a point z in X such that lim n y n = z . Therefore, by (1.3), we have lim n y n = lim n g ( x n ) = lim n f ( x n + 1 ) = z .

Suppose that f and g are compatible mappings. Now, by the weak reciprocal continuity of f and g, we obtain lim n f g ( x n ) = f z or lim n g f ( x n ) = g z . Let lim n f g ( x n ) = f z , then the compatibility of f and g gives lim n d ( f g x n , g f x n ) = 0 , that is, lim n d ( g f x n , f z ) = 0 .

Hence, lim n g f ( x n ) = f z . From (1.3), we get lim n g f ( x n + 1 ) = lim n g g ( x n ) = f z .

Therefore, from (1.2), we get
d ( g z , g g x n ) 1 q d ( f z , f g x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
d ( g z , f z ) 1 q d ( f z , f z ) = 0 .
Hence, f z = g z . Again, the compatibility of f and g implies the commutativity at a coincidence point. Hence, g f z = f g z = f f z = g g z . Using (1.2), we obtain
d ( g z , g g z ) 1 q d ( f z , f g z ) = 1 q d ( g z , g g z ) ,

which proves that g z = g g z . We also get g z = g g z = f g z and then gz is a common fixed point of f and g.

Next, suppose that lim n g f ( x n ) = g z . The assumption g ( X ) f ( X ) implies that g z = f u for some u X and therefore, lim n g f ( x n ) = f u .

The compatibility of f and g implies that lim n f g ( x n ) = f u . By virtue of (1.3), we have lim n g f ( x n + 1 ) = lim n g g ( x n ) = f u . Using (1.2), we get
d ( g u , g g x n ) 1 q d ( f u , f g x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
d ( g u , f u ) 1 q d ( f u , f u ) = 0 .
Then we get f u = g u . The compatibility of f and g yields f g u = g g u = f f u = g f u . Finally, using (1.2), we obtain
d ( g u , g g u ) 1 q d ( f u , f g u ) = 1 q d ( g u , g g u ) ,

that is, g u = g g u . We also have g u = g g u = f g u and gu is a common fixed point of f and g.

Now, suppose that f and g are R-weakly commuting of type ( A f ) . Now, the weak reciprocal continuity of f and g implies that lim n f g ( x n ) = f z or lim n g f ( x n ) = g z . Let us first assume that lim n f g ( x n ) = f z . Then the R-weak commutativity of type ( A f ) of f and g yields
d ( g g x n , f g x n ) R d ( f x n , g x n )
and therefore
lim n d ( g g x n , f z ) R d ( z , z ) = 0 .
This proves that lim n g g x n = f z . Again, using (1.2), we get
d ( g z , g g x n ) 1 q d ( f z , f g x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
d ( g z , f z ) 1 q d ( f z , f z ) = 0 .
Hence, we get f z = g z . Again, by using the R-weak commutativity of type ( A f ) , we have
d ( g g z , f g z ) 1 q d ( g z , f z ) = 1 q d ( f z , f z ) = 0 .
This yields g g z = f g z . Therefore, f f z = f g z = g f z = g g z . Using (1.2), we get
d ( g z , g g z ) 1 q d ( f z , f g z ) = 1 q d ( g z , g g z ) ,

that is, g z = g g z . Then we also get g z = g g z = f g z and gz is a common fixed point of f and g.

Similar proof works in the case where lim n g f ( x n ) = g z .

Suppose that f and g are R-weakly commuting of type ( A g ) . Again, as done above, we can easily prove that fz is a common fixed point of f and g.

Finally, suppose that f and g are R-weakly commuting of type ( P ) . The weak reciprocal continuity of f and g implies that lim n f g ( x n ) = f z or lim n g f ( x n ) = g z . Let us assume that lim n f g ( x n ) = f z . Then the R-weak commutativity of type ( P ) of f and g yields
d ( f f x n , g g x n ) R d ( f x n , g x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
lim n d ( f f x n , g g x n ) R d ( z , z ) = 0 ,

that is, lim n d ( f f x n , g g x n ) = 0 .

Using (1.1) and (1.3), we have, f g x n 1 = f f x n f z as n , which gives g g x n f z as n . Also, using (1.2), we get
d ( g z , g g x n ) 1 q d ( f z , f g x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
d ( g z , f z ) 1 q d ( f z , f z ) = 0 .
Hence, f z = g z . Again, by using the R-weak commutativity of type ( P ) ,
d ( f f z , g g z ) R d ( f z , g z ) = 0 .

This yields f f z = g g z .

Therefore, f f z = f g z = g f z = g g z . Using (1.2), we get
d ( g z , g g z ) 1 q d ( f z , f g z ) = 1 q d ( g z , g g z ) .

This proves that g z = g g z . Hence, g z = g g z = f g z and gz is a common fixed point of f and g.

Similar proof works in the case where lim n g f ( x n ) = g z .

Uniqueness of the common fixed point theorem follows easily in each of the four cases by using (1.2). □

2 G-metric spaces

In 1963, Gahler [9] introduced the concept of 2-metric spaces and claimed that a 2-metric is a generalization of the usual notion of a metric, but some authors proved that there is no relation between these two functions. It is clear that in 2-metric, d ( x , y , z ) is to be taken as the area of the triangle with vertices x, y and z in R 2 . However, Hsiao [10] showed that for every contractive definition, with x n = T n x 0 , every orbit is linearly dependent, thus rendering fixed point theorems in such spaces trivial.

In 1992, Dhage [11] introduced the concept of a D-metric space. The situation for a D-metric space is quite different from that for 2-metric spaces. Geometrically, a D-metric D ( x , y , z ) represents the perimeter of the triangle with vertices x, y and z in R 2 . Recently, Mustafa and Sims [10] have shown that most of the results concerning Dhage’s D-metric spaces are invalid. Therefore, they introduced an improved version of the generalized metric space structure, which they called G-metric spaces.

In 2006, Mustafa and Sims [12] introduced the concept of G-metric spaces as follows.

Definition 8 ([12])

Let X be a nonempty set, and let G : X × X × X R + be a function satisfying the following axioms:

(G1) G ( x , y , z ) = 0 if x = y = z ,

(G2) 0 < G ( x , x , y ) for all x , y X with x y ,

(G3) G ( x , x , y ) G ( x , y , z ) for all x , y , z X with z y ,

(G4) G ( x , y , z ) = G ( x , z , y ) = G ( y , z , x ) = (symmetry in all three variables),

(G5) G ( x , y , z ) G ( x , a , a ) + G ( a , y , z ) for all x , y , z , a X (rectangle inequality).

Then the function G is called a generalized metric or, more specifically, a G-metric on X and the pair ( X , G ) is called a G-metric space.

Definition 9 ([12])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space and let { x n } be a sequence of points in X. A point x in X is said to be the limit of the sequence { x n } , lim m , n G ( x , x n , x m ) = 0 , and one says that the sequence { x n } is G-convergent to x.

Thus, x n x , n or lim n x n = x in a G-metric space ( X , G ) if for each ε > 0 , there exists a positive integer N such that G ( x , x n , x m ) < ε for all m , n N .

Now, we state some results from the papers [10, 1215] which are helpful for proving our main results.

Proposition 1 ([12])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. Then the following are equivalent:
  1. (1)

    { x n } is G convergent to x,

     
  2. (2)

    G ( x n , x n , x ) 0 as n ,

     
  3. (3)

    G ( x n , x , x ) 0 as n ,

     
  4. (4)

    G ( x m , x n , x ) 0 as m , n .

     

Definition 10 ([12])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. A sequence { x n } is called G-Cauchy if, for each ε > 0 , there exists a positive integer N such that G ( x n , x m , x l ) < ε for all n , m , l N ; i.e., if G ( x n , x m , x l ) 0 as n , m , l .

Proposition 2 ([15])

If ( X , G ) is a G-metric space, then the following are equivalent:
  1. (1)

    the sequence { x n } is G-Cauchy,

     
  2. (2)

    for each ε > 0 , there exists a positive integer N such that G ( x n , x m , x m ) < ε for all n , m N .

     

Proposition 3 ([12])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. Then the function G ( x , y , z ) is jointly continuous in all three of its variables.

Definition 11 ([12])

A G-metric space ( X , G ) is called a symmetric G-metric space if
G ( x , y , y ) = G ( y , x , x ) for all  x , y  in  X .

Proposition 4 ([14])

Every G-metric space ( X , G ) will define a metric space ( X , d G ) by
  1. (i)

    d G ( x , y ) = G ( x , y , y ) + G ( y , x , x ) for all x, y in X.

     
If ( X , G ) is a symmetric G-metric space, then
  1. (ii)

    d G ( x , y ) = 2 G ( x , y , y ) for all x, y in X.

     
However, if ( X , G ) is not symmetric, then it follows from the G-metric properties that
  1. (iii)

    3 2 G ( x , y , y ) d G ( x , y ) 3 G ( x , y , y ) for all x, y in X.

     

Definition 12 ([14])

A G-metric space ( X , G ) is said to be G-complete if every G-Cauchy sequence in ( X , G ) is G-convergent in X.

Proposition 5 ([14])

A G-metric space ( X , G ) is G-complete if and only if ( X , d G ) is a complete metric space.

Proposition 6 ([15])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. Then, for any x , y , z , a X , it follows that
  1. (i)

    if G ( x , y , z ) = 0 , then x = y = z ,

     
  2. (ii)

    G ( x , y , z ) G ( x , x , y ) + G ( x , x , z ) ,

     
  3. (iii)

    G ( x , y , y ) 2 G ( y , x , x ) ,

     
  4. (iv)

    G ( x , y , z ) G ( x , a , z ) + G ( a , y , z ) ,

     
  5. (v)

    G ( x , y , z ) 2 3 ( G ( x , y , a ) + G ( x , a , z ) + G ( a , y , z ) ) ,

     
  6. (vi)

    G ( x , y , z ) ( G ( x , a , a ) + G ( y , a , a ) + G ( z , a , a ) ) .

     

Definition 13 ([16])

A pair of self-mappings ( f , g ) of a G-metric space ( X , G ) is said to be compatible if lim n G ( f g x n , g f x n , g f x n ) = 0 or lim n G ( g f x n , f g x n , f g x n ) = 0 whenever { x n } is a sequence in X such that lim n f ( x n ) = lim n g ( x n ) = z for some z in X.

Definition 14 ([17])

A pair of self-mappings ( f , g ) of a G-metric space ( X , G ) is said to be R-weakly commuting at a point x in X if G ( f g x , g f x , g f x ) R G ( f x , g x , g x ) for some R > 0 .

Definition 15 ([17])

Two self-maps f and g of a G-metric space ( X , G ) are called pointwise R-weakly commuting on X if, given x in X, there exists R > 0 such that G ( f g x , g f x , g f x ) R G ( f x , g x , g x ) .

Definition 16 ([6])

Two self-maps f and g of a G-metric space ( X , G ) are called R-weakly commuting of type ( A g ) if there exists some R > 0 such that G ( f f x , g f x , g f x ) R G ( f x , g x , g x ) for all x in X. Similarly, two self-mappings f and g of a G-metric space ( X , G ) are called R-weakly commuting of type ( A f ) if there exists some R > 0 such that G ( f g x , g g x , g g x ) R G ( f x , g x , g x ) for all x in X.

Definition 17 ([6])

Two self-mappings f and g of a G-metric space ( X , G ) are called R-weakly commuting of type ( P ) if there exists some R > 0 such that G ( f f x , g g x , g g x ) R G ( f x , g x , g x ) for all x in X.

Theorem 2 Let f and g be two weakly reciprocally continuous self-mappings of a complete G-metric space ( X , G ) satisfying the following conditions:
g ( X ) f ( X )
(2.1)
for any x , y , z X and q > 1 , we have that
q G ( g x , g y , g z ) G ( f x , f y , f z ) .
(2.2)

If f and g are either compatible or R-weakly commuting of type ( A g ) or R-weakly commuting of type ( A f ) or R-weakly commuting of type ( P ) , then f and g have a unique common fixed point.

Proof Let x 0 be any point in X. Since g ( X ) f ( X ) , there exists a sequence of points { x n } such that g ( x n ) = f ( x n + 1 ) .

Define a sequence { y n } in X by
y n = g ( x n ) = f ( x n + 1 ) .
(2.3)
Now, we will show that { y n } is a G-Cauchy sequence in X. For proving this, by (2.2) take x = x n , y = x n + 1 , z = x n + 1 , we have
G ( g x n , g x n + 1 , g x n + 1 ) 1 / q G ( f x n , f x n + 1 , f x n + 1 ) = 1 / q G ( g x n 1 , g x n , g x n ) .
Continuing in the same way, we have
G ( g x n , g x n + 1 , g x n + 1 ) 1 / q n G ( g x 0 , g x 1 , g x 1 ) G ( y n , y n + 1 , y n + 1 ) 1 / q n G ( y 0 , y 1 , y 1 ) .
Therefore, for all n , m N (a set of natural numbers), n < m , we have by using (G5)
G ( y n , y m , y m ) G ( y n , y n + 1 , y n + 1 ) + G ( y n + 1 , y n + 2 , y n + 2 ) + G ( y n + 2 , y n + 3 , y n + 3 ) + + G ( y m 1 , y m , y m ) ( 1 / q n + 1 / q n + 1 + 1 / q n + 2 + + 1 / q m 1 ) G ( y 0 , y 1 , y 1 ) ( 1 / q n + 1 / q n + 1 + 1 / q n + 2 + ) G ( y 0 , y 1 , y 1 ) = 1 q n 1 ( q 1 ) G ( y 0 , y 1 , y 1 ) 0 as  n .

Thus, { y n } is a G-Cauchy sequence in X. Since ( X , G ) is a complete G-metric space, there exists a point z in X such that lim n y n = z . Therefore, by (2.3), we have lim n y n = lim n g ( x n ) = lim n f ( x n + 1 ) = z .

Suppose that f and g are compatible mappings. Now, the weak reciprocal continuity of f and g implies that lim n f g ( x n ) = f z or lim n g f ( x n ) = g z . Let lim n f g ( x n ) = f z , then the compatibility of f and g gives lim n G ( g f x n , f g x n , f g x n ) = 0 , that is, G ( lim n g f x n , f z , f z ) = 0 .

Hence, lim n g f ( x n ) = f z . From (2.3), we get lim n g f ( x n + 1 ) = lim n g g ( x n ) = f z .

Therefore, by (2.2), we get
G ( g z , g g x n , g g x n ) 1 q G ( f z , f g x n , f g x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
G ( g z , f z , f z ) 1 q G ( f z , f z , f z ) = 0 .
Hence, f z = g z . Again, the compatibility of f and g implies the commutativity at a coincidence point. Hence, g f z = f g z = f f z = g g z . Now, we claim that g z = g g z . Suppose not, then by using (2.2), we obtain
G ( g z , g g z , g g z ) 1 q G ( f z , f g z , f g z )
and
G ( g z , g g z , g g z ) 1 q G ( g z , g g z , g g z ) ,

which gives contradiction because q > 1 . Hence, g z = g g z . Hence, g z = g g z = f g z and gz is a common fixed point of f and g.

Next suppose that lim n g f ( x n ) = g z . The assumption g ( X ) f ( X ) implies that g z = f u for some u X and therefore, lim n g f ( x n ) = f u .

The compatibility of f and g implies that lim n f g ( x n ) = f u . By virtue of (2.3), this gives lim n g f ( x n + 1 ) = lim n g g ( x n ) = f u . Using (2.2), we get
G ( g u , g g x n , g g x n ) 1 q G ( f u , f g x n , f g x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
G ( g u , f u , f u ) 1 q G ( f u , f u , f u ) = 0 ,
which gives f u = g u . The compatibility of f and g yields f g u = g g u = f f u = g f u . Finally, we claim that g u = g g u . Suppose not, then by using (2.2), we obtain
G ( g u , g g u , g g u ) 1 q G ( f u , f g u , f g u )
and
G ( g u , g g u , g g u ) 1 q G ( g u , g g u , g g u ) ,

that is, g u = g g u . Hence, g u = g g u = f g u and gu is a common fixed point of f and g.

Now, suppose that f and g are R-weakly commuting of type ( A f ) . Now, the weak reciprocal continuity of f and g implies that lim n f g ( x n ) = f z or lim n g f ( x n ) = g z . Let us first assume that lim n f g ( x n ) = f z . Then the R-weak commutativity of type ( A f ) of f and g yields
G ( g g x n , f g x n , f g x n ) R G ( g x n , f x n , f x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
G ( lim n g g x n , g z , g z ) R G ( z , z , z ) = 0 .
This proves that lim n g g x n = f z . Again, using (2.2), we get
G ( g z , g g x n , g g x n ) 1 q G ( f z , f g x n , f g x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
G ( g z , f z , f z ) 1 q G ( f z , f z , f z ) = 0 .
Hence, we get f z = g z . Again, by using the R-weak commutativity of type ( A f ) ,
G ( g g z , f g z , f g z ) G ( g z , f z , f z ) = 0 .
This yields g g z = f g z . Therefore, f f z = f g z = g f z = g g z . We claim that g z = g g z . Suppose not, using (2.2), we get
G ( g z , g g z , g g z ) 1 q G ( f z , f g z , f g z )
and
G ( g z , g g z , g g z ) 1 q G ( g z , g g z , g g z ) ,

a contradiction, that is, g z = g g z . Hence, g z = g g z = f g z and gz is a common fixed point of f and g.

Similar proof works in the case where lim n g f ( x n ) = g z .

Suppose that f and g are R-weakly commuting of type ( A g ) . Again, as done above, we can easily prove that gz is a common fixed point of f and g.

Finally, suppose f and g are R-weakly commuting of type ( P ) . The weak reciprocal continuity of f and g implies that lim n f g ( x n ) = f z or lim n g f ( x n ) = g z . Let us assume that lim n f g ( x n ) = f z . Then the R-weak commutativity of type ( P ) of f and g yields
G ( f f x n , g g x n , g g x n ) R G ( f x n , g x n , g x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
G ( lim n f f x n , lim n g g x n , lim n g g x n ) R G ( z , z , z ) = 0 .
That is,
lim n G ( lim n f f x n , lim n g g x n , lim n g g x n ) = 0 .
Using (2.1) and (2.3), we have f g x n 1 = f f x n f z as n , which gives g g x n f z as n . Also, using (2.2), we get
G ( g z , g g x n , g g x n ) 1 q G ( f z , f g x n , f g x n ) .
Taking the limit as n , we get
G ( g z , f z , f z ) 1 q G ( f z , f z , f z ) = 0 .
Hence, f z = g z . Again, by using the R-weak commutativity of type ( P ) ,
G ( f f z , g g z , g g z ) R G ( f z , g z , g z ) = 0 .

This yields f f z = g g z .

Therefore, f f z = f g z = g f z = g g z . Finally, we claim that g z = g g z . Suppose not, using (2.2), we get
G ( g z , g g z , g g z ) 1 q G ( f z , f g z , f g z )
and
G ( g z , g g z , g g z ) 1 q G ( g z , g g z , g g z ) ,

a contradiction, we get g z = g g z . Hence, g z = g g z = f g z and gz is a common fixed point of f and g.

Similar proof works in the case where lim n g f ( x n ) = g z .

Uniqueness of the common fixed point theorem follows easily in each of the four cases by using (2.2). □

We now give an example (see also [18]) to illustrate Theorem 2.

Example 1 Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space, where X = [ 2 , 20 ] and
G ( x , y , z ) = ( | x y | + | y z | + | z x | ) ,
for all x , y , z X . Define f , g : X X by

Let { x n } be a sequence in X such that either x n = 2 or x n = 5 + 1 / n for each n.

Then, clearly, f and g satisfy all the conditions of Theorem 2 and have a unique common fixed point at x = 2 .

Notes

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the editor and the referees for their useful comments and suggestions. The second author would like to thank the Higher Education Research Promotion and National Research University Project of Thailand’s Office of the Higher Education Commission for financial support.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
School of Mathematics and Computer Applications, Thapar University
(2)
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT)

References

  1. Jungck G: Commuting mappings and fixed points. Am. Math. Mon. 1976, 83: 261–263. 10.2307/2318216MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Jungck G: Compatible mappings and common fixed points. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 1986, 9: 771–779. 10.1155/S0161171286000935MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Common fixed point theorems for a pair of weakly compatible mappings in fuzzy metric spaces. J. Appl. Math. 2011., 2011: Article ID 637958Google Scholar
  4. Pant RP: Common fixed points of non-commuting mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1994, 188: 436–440. 10.1006/jmaa.1994.1437MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Common fixed points for R -weakly commuting in fuzzy metric spaces. Ann. Univ. Ferrara 2012, 58: 389–406. 10.1007/s11565-012-0150-zMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Pathak HK, Cho YJ, Kang SM: Remarks of R -weakly commuting mappings and common fixed point theorems. Bull. Korean Math. Soc. 1997, 34: 247–257.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Pant RP: Common fixed points of four mappings. Bull. Calcutta Math. Soc. 1998, 90: 281–286.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Pant RP, Bisht RK, Arora D: Weak reciprocal continuity and fixed point theorems. Ann. Univ. Ferrara 2011, 57: 181–190. 10.1007/s11565-011-0119-3MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Gahler S: 2-metrices Raume und ihre topologische Struktur. Math. Nachr. 1963, 26: 115–148. 10.1002/mana.19630260109MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Mustafa Z, Sims B: Some remarks concerning D -metric spaces. In Proceedings of International Conference on Fixed Point Theory and Applications. Yokohama Publishers, Yokohama; 2004:189–198. Valencia, Spain, 13-19 JulyGoogle Scholar
  11. Dhage BC: Generalized metric spaces and mappings with fixed point. Bull. Calcutta Math. Soc. 1992, 84: 329–336.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Mustafa Z, Sims B: A new approach to generalized metric spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2006, 7: 289–297.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Manro S, Kumar S, Bhatia SS: Weakly compatible maps of type ( A ) in G -metric spaces. Demonstr. Math. 2012, 45(4):901–908.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. Mustafa Z, Obiedat H, Awawdeh F: Some fixed point theorems for mappings on complete G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2008., 2008: Article ID 18970Google Scholar
  15. Mustafa Z, Sims B: Fixed point theorems for contractive mappings in complete G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2009., 2009: Article ID 917175Google Scholar
  16. Manro S, Bhatia SS, Kumar S: Expansion mapping theorems in G -metric spaces. Int. J. Contemp. Math. Sci. 2010, 5(51):2529–2535.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. Manro S, Kumar S, Bhatia SS: R weakly commuting maps in G metric spaces. Fasc. Math. 2011, 47: 11–17.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Pant RP: A common fixed point theorem under a new condition. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 1999, 30: 147–152.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Manro and Kumam; licensee Springer. 2012

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.